Messages

yes, honestly

Let me guess you believe that Kilkenny don't do tactics either.

Oh come on you can't be that naive. If this was Sheedy, it'd be a different story.

Kilkenny most certainly do do tactics. But those tactic tend to be very straightforward and sensible, and don't involve convoluted game plans that players struggle to keep up with.

yes, honestly

But there is a sense of mind games going on here.

well, which is it? Mind games or a sense of mind games? They're 2 very different things.

The ACL is only one of four major ligaments in the knee, and Hartmann's theory is that if the rest of the knee is undamaged, which in Shefflin's case it was, then it is possible to restore full and complete strength.

so you know better than Ger Hartmann Reilliers, yea?

no, completely incorrect. Kilkenny said nothing at all. It was the media that started with this bullshit. Ian O'Riordan and the likes. Kilkenny never said a word, unless asked. It was the same with every other injury. Tommy Walsh, it was said on the 6 o'clock news after the Tipp-Waterford game, had broken his collar-bone. Again, this was bullshit but it didn't stop Darragh Moloney buying into the sensationalist bullshit that journalists insist on when it comes to Kilkenny players. Hogan's injury was overplayed too, and I expect the latest knock he picked up last night will be also.

As for now, it seems pretty clear. Henry was told by Ger Hartmann that if the rest of the knee ligaments hold strong, theres a slim chance he can play. Cody will give him every chance, given the player he is. The team will be named friday week. Only then we'll know for sure if he plays or not, but the likelihood is that he won't

Whats so ambiguous about that now tell me?

And why do we not get the same kind of information about Tipp? Why aren't the journos down in Thurles watching how they're getting on in training? Because sensationalising every little thing to do with Tipp doesn't have the same impact as doing likewise with Kilkenny does.

This isn't mind-games. This is media bullshit, plain and simple.

did he do his cruciate or not or is this just ridiculous mind games from Cody, who's fans and himself will tell you again and again the man doesn't play mind games. Guess he does now.

ah, you've found Kilkenny out Relliers. They took Henry off in the first half of the Cork game even though there was nothing wrong with him, just to mess with Tipp's (who hadn't even qualified for the all-Ireland at that stage) heads.

cop on you clown

read the reports on kkcats.com. Henry trained but very much held back.

which is contrary from the typical bullshit Ian O'Riordan is peddling in the Irish Times today about Henry pushing himself for every ball. The same Ian O'Riordan who said only the other week that Kilkenny's training methods should be called into question given the number of cruciate ligament injuries suffered by their players over the last couple of years (JJ *1, Tennyson *1, Richie O'Neill *2, Henry *2). Thats loads.

2004 should have been their year. They should have beaten Kilkenny in the semi-final and arguably would have but for the skating rink they played on that day, plus the fact that Mullane was suspended.

I think Waterford would have been better able for that Cork team that year than Kilkenny (who were beset with misfortune after misfortune during the course of that season), and honestly think, with their full team available, would have taken Cork.

gutted for them. Dublin no way deserved anything out of this game yet could well have won it.

Not an unbiased view (seeing as its about a clubmate of mine), but if Rob Hardy hadn't have been injured Dublin would have won this game. He steadied the ship considerably when he came on. His was the ball in for Costello's goal in the second half, and it was his shot that flashed off the post at the end.

Your passage there is so outdated.

well it relates to a book that was written back then so, no, its not outdated at all. Unless Corcoran has admitted he made a mistake and rewrote it since.

.               
It was relevant back then, it isn't now like 4 years later. Times have changed. Slot has changed in 4 years.                         

way to miss the point

Your passage there is so outdated.

well it relates to a book that was written back then so, no, its not outdated at all. Unless Corcoran has admitted he made a mistake and rewrote it since.

[Corcoran reveals that in the run-up to Cork's All-Ireland hurling semi-final against Waterford, the Rebels had two posters made up, entitled, 'Our World,' and 'Their World.' Our World contained a list of the many positive qualities possessed by Cork. Their World listed the qualities the Corkmen thought were typical of Waterford, including, "Losing. Fighting Among Themselves. Playing for oneself, not the team. Relying on luck. Bringing others down to their level."]

speaking of books, remember this?

Corcoran joins 'trash talkers'

ONE of the most appealing features of the GAA has always been the obvious respect the players have for each other. No matter how hard the game is or how fierce the rivalry, hurlers and footballers have nothing but praise for each other when they leave the pitch.

Football and hurling have been spared the tabloid-driven bad-mouthing culture of soccer. The habit is so prevalent in American sport they even have a name for it, 'Trash Talk.' That's why the recent macho media posturing of the Australian Rules players struck such a false note. Whatever their other faults, GAA players don't go in for that kind of useless chat.

Or at least they didn't. Not till the release of Brian Corcoran's autobiography in which the Cork player decides to dispense with the good manners which up till now have been central to relations between teams.

Corcoran reveals that in the run-up to Cork's All-Ireland hurling semi-final against Waterford, the Rebels had two posters made up, entitled, 'Our World,' and 'Their World.' Our World contained a list of the many positive qualities possessed by Cork. Their World listed the qualities the Corkmen thought were typical of Waterford, including, "Losing. Fighting Among Themselves. Playing for oneself, not the team. Relying on luck. Bringing others down to their level."

There you have it. Cork's opinion of Waterford, not merely used in the build-up to the game but proudly repeated in print by Corcoran. You can't finesse this one or minimise it. According to Cork, Waterford's players fight among themselves, play for themselves rather than the team, rely on luck and bring others down to their level. It is probably the most insulting thing to be written about one group of hurlers by another.

Elsewhere Corcoran accuses Waterford of being a group of individuals rather than a team, claims that Tony Browne gave up in the 2005 All-Ireland quarter-final, something which a Cork player would never do, and notes that Waterford clubs seem to be perpetually fighting each other in the latter stages of their county championship.

To top it all, he notes that the big difference between the current Cork and Waterford teams is that, "they are playing for greatness within their own county but we are playing for greatness in the history of hurling."

These insults would be bad enough if they were true. But they are actually a distortion of reality which gravely traduce a team which has given much to hurling over the last decade.

Take that line about, "bringing others down to their level." Well, the best game of hurling in recent years was the 2004 Munster final when Waterford actually brought hurling up to a level that Cork could not match.

I have not noticed the likes of Paul Flynn, Ken McGrath, Tony Browne and Dan Shanahan playing for themselves and not the team either. And I'm not convinced that Eoin Kelly, John Mullane and Dave Bennett rely on luck rather than skill.

This idea that Cork do everything right and Waterford do everything wrong is bizarre in the extreme. Cork have enormous resources of population to call on, much greater than that of any other hurling county. Their current team includes players with All-Ireland under-21 and minor medals. Waterford, by contrast, have had little success at under-age level and have nothing like Cork's pick. In the circumstances Justin McCarthy's two Munster titles may be just as impressive a feat as the two All-Irelands Donal O'Grady and John Allen steered Cork to.

(It goes without saying, of course, that Cork's caricature of Waterford is two fingers to McCarthy who is being portrayed as a manager who'd put up with this kind of rubbish from his team.)

So what's going on? Why has Corcoran opted to break with tradition and stick the boot into the Decies? He's not the kind of guy you'd have expected to come out with something like this after a long career during which he always played the game in an exemplary spirit. Having interviewed him, I'd have to say that he struck me as a modest man and most unlikely trash talker.

Perhaps the problem is that the Erin's Own man has become affected by the prevailing philosophy of a Cork side which, in recent years, became the most self-aggrandising outfit in the history of Gaelic games. He probably didn't have anything against Waterford, they just happened to sustain collateral damage as Cork rained down missiles of praise upon themselves.

This idea that Cork do everything right and Waterford do everything wrong is bizarre in the extreme

For example, in the same chapter where he disses the Decies, Corcoran describes a speech he gave to his team-mates outside the Burlington on the morning of that semi-final where he went on, at surprising length for a rainy day, about the parallels between Cork and Tiger Woods (they are Tiger to Waterford's Sergio Garcia, was the jist of it.)

But the unpalatable truth for Corcoran and his team-mates is that they inhabit a completely different universe from Tiger Woods and invoking his example, as though they were his equals, is deluded in the extreme. It's like a man who's just built six houses in Glanmire invoking the example of Donald Trump. Or a lad who plays the casio organ in the corner of the pub of a Saturday night telling you he understands Michael Jackson's paranoia because that's how it goes when you're a pop star.

Tiger has to take on the best in the world, the pick of every country where they play golf. Every failure of nerve or technique has the potential to cost him vast sums of money. Brian Corcoran has to take on opponents from a handful of counties on a small island. And he'll still get paid at the end of the week no matter how he does.

This is not to belittle hurling, just to put it into perspective. You don't love your wife any the less because she's not Eva Herzigova just as she's forgiven you for not being Brad Pitt. But it's this notion that Gaelic games should ape professional sport which is at the heart of Corcoran's witless words on Waterford. The whole book is obviously inspired by books on American sports where this kind of nonsense is a lingua franca.

Seeing it applied to our own games is an unpleasant experience. It's like wandering into an old beloved GAA bar, the type that used to have Carrolls All-Stars posters on the wall and a man who knew Mick Mackey in the corner, and finding it's been transformed into Big Tex's All-American Sports Bar And Grill.

The last laugh, of course, is on the author. Because after all the huffing and putting Cork didn't even win the All-Ireland. And though Corcoran claims that, "no other team has been as professional as us, no other team has our team spirit, no other team has made the sacrifices we have," it is Kilkenny who have been the best team of the contemporary era.

Judging by the book, Cork are fond of their stats. So here's a stat: Five All-Irelands, Kilkenny 3 Cork 2.

Without (one suspects) Brian Cody having recourse to posters denigrating the opposition, the Cats have done just fine.

as a little bored at work exercise, perhaps we could fill in separate 'Our World', 'Their World' venn diagrams for this years semi. Would be interesting for sure!

Cadogan certainly milked it to the full.

A nasty piece of works will get his fill of it one of these days playing either football or hurling.

Like eh the saint Galvin? Yes poor old Galvin just slipped while walking by, ffs like.

good mature debate there

double post

Edward Carson was prosecuting counsel in the trial of Oscar Wilde that ultimately brought about his demise.

Not correct. Be defended Lord Queensbury in a libel action take by Wilde that ultimately brought about his demise.

yep, you're right. And the p***k wouldn't take the case initially, until some henchmen of Queensbury had bribed and blackmailed a load of young lads to agree to testify against him. He gave that evidence to Carson and then and only then, when he was sure he couldn't lose, did he take the case. So, yes, initially (and technically) he was acting as defense for Queensbury, but the entire context of the trial changed around and he was acting more as prosecution, despite being in defense. Either way, f**k him.